Our company's 401K plan doesn't allow us to buy individual stocks or ETFs, if I could I would invest it all in oil. Just out of curiosity can any of you invest in oil via your 401K plan?

Oh BTW, my bro-in-law was able to buy shares in Valero via his 401K while he was employed there, just wondering if in general the majority of companies out there allow such trading/investing or is my 401K just a crappy one...

But back to the OP's original question...is nationlization of the oil industry too far fetched?

... "what happens in a world where the very core of the capital markets system is gradually deleveraging to a point where maintaining a liquid and orderly market becomes impossible: large swings on low volume, massive bid-offer spreads, huge trading costs, inability to clear and numerous failed trades?"...as retail investors retrench more and more, which they will due to previously discussed secular themes as well as demographics, and HFT becomes and ever more dominant force, which it has no choice but to, liquidity and investment horizons will get ever shorter and shorter and shorter, until eventually by simple limit expansion, they hit zero, or some investing singularity, for those who are thought experiment inclined.

Pops Lahood is RINO. He is a former social studies teacher. He has no experience in transportation or the energy sector. From his comments, I suspect he is in the camp of those who believe in abiogenic oil. His ideas run counter to what we have observed. That makes him a very dangerous man indeed and might explain why we are spending billions on roads rather than rebuilding our light rail.

I would say that peak oil has already effected and shaped the markets, and the question would be better rephrased as "Public Awareness-How will it continue to shape the markets".

If it wasn't for peak oil and the prices which came with it (the main thing that people are aware of, Americans not being much for current events, reading the newspaper or paying much attention to the world around them) we wouldn't have some of the stimuli for changes which are already happening. Be they wind farm buildouts, alternatively powered transport for Joe Six Pack, stay-cations, the reaction of the airlines to pack every flight they fly to the max, and even the surge in local economies profiting from the higher price of oil in places like North Dakota.

Seenmostofit, you have described an efficient market reacting to supply disruptions shortages with priceing signals that have told some technology companies to increase wind-farm investment and others their tight-shale plays. Consumers have reacted likewise, by staycationing out back by the weber, or sitting on their neighbors laps (in the plane).

Peak oil is another theory/model altogether (based on Hubbert's observations and a complex calculus) which suggests oil production is limited in geo/eco regions, rises and falls in a rough logistic curve, and lags oil discoveries by 40 years. (The curve also measures the ultimate reserve potential of that same region.) I doubt one in one thousand people have the faintest idea what I just said. Apparently U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood is not that one.

Cloud9 wrote:Pops Lahood is RINO. He is a former social studies teacher. He has no experience in transportation or the energy sector. From his comments, I suspect he is in the camp of those who believe in abiogenic oil. His ideas run counter to what we have observed. That makes him a very dangerous man indeed and might explain why we are spending billions on roads rather than rebuilding our light rail.

pstarr wrote:What a tragedy to have a fool such as him in a position of power

You could be referring to almost any politician, bureaucrat or "business leader"...

Joe P. joeparente.com"Only when the last tree is cut; only when the last river is polluted; only when the last fish is caught; only then will they realize that you cannot eat money." - Cree Indian Proverb

Pablo2079 wrote:I'm not sure there will ever be full recognition of "Peak Oil" by the MSM.

The news will continually be cluttered up with symptoms of peak oil. The general public will associate things like "war in Iran" for the reason gas is now $7 a gallon rather than the root cause being Peak Oil. At the same time, the economy will continue to be ravaged. All Joe public will know is that they don't have a job, can't afford groceries and their house is being foreclosed on. I don't think the majority of people will take the time to research the root cause of the economic melt down or necessarily care at that point.

You have just identified the root of the world's problems since the beginning of human history. Intellectual laziness which translates into wanting to believe any dogma or cult teaching instead of dealing with reality. This syndrome will contribute greatly to the looming cataclysm (sorry but windfarms even if they grew at 200% per year would not save us).

dissident wrote:Intellectual laziness which translates into wanting to believe any dogma or cult teaching instead of dealing with reality.

Obama just gave a major energy speech today.

Once again he blamed high gasoline prices on evil speculators and promised to enact new government regulations to fix the problem and bring gasoline prices down again.

Better than the last. As I remember Bush blamed the Axis of Evil and invaded Iraq. Which one is goofier?

I still find it amazing that we spent around two trillion in actual and hidden costs on the war with Iraq and we in return got zip! I'm glad to see Planty is upset with Obama for not bringing the criminals to a speedy trial for the waste of blood and treasury on false pretenses.

The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
... Theodore Roosevelt

Lore wrote:I still find it amazing that we spent around two trillion in actual and hidden costs on the war with Iraq and we in return got zip! ... upset with Obama for not bringing the criminals to a speedy trial for the waste of blood and treasury on false pretenses.

Hi Lorey:

Its naive of you to expect Obama to bring the "criminals to a speedy trial" for the war in Iraq when Obama is still waging a war in Afghanistan, recently concluded an unconstitutional war in Libya, is funding the rebels in the civil war in Syria, and threatens war with Iran.

Lore wrote:I still find it amazing that we spent around two trillion in actual and hidden costs on the war with Iraq and we in return got zip! ... upset with Obama for not bringing the criminals to a speedy trial for the waste of blood and treasury on false pretenses.

Hi Lorey:

Its naive of you to expect Obama to bring the "criminals to a speedy trial" for the war in Iraq when Obama is still waging a war in Afghanistan, recently concluded an unconstitutional war in Libya, is funding the rebels in the civil war in Syria, and threatens war with Iran.

Sounds very reasonable to me. It's a dereliction of duty. You don't fail to prosecute for justice just because you're busy with other things. It should have taken place three years ago, well before Libya, Syria, and heightened tensions with Iran.

Another beef I have is where is the prosecution based on the 11 deaths with the GOM oil platform spill. It's pretty easy to see who really runs the Government, big business.

The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
... Theodore Roosevelt

Lore wrote: It's a dereliction of duty. You don't fail to prosecute for justice just because you're busy with other things. It should have taken place three years ago, well before Libya, Syria, and heightened tensions with Iran.

Yes.

I made this same point way back when Obama went to the CIA in 2009 and gave a highly publicized speech in which he announced that no one would be punished in any way for torture, misleading intelligence, or anything else they might have done prior to this administration.

IMHO the people who really dropped the ball were the folks in Congress who blocked the impeachment of Bush after the 2006 elections. The dems won a huge majority that year on the promise that they would stop the war in Iraq if they took over Congress, but after taking over Congress Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the other dems who ran Congress squelched all impeachment bills and instead voted for and authorized four more years of war and hundreds more billions to be wasted in Iraq.

Surprising that MSNBC "gets it" that Obama's attempt to blame high energy prices on evil Wall Street speculators is just political posturing that does nothing to solve the problem.

Obama is latest proposal is clearly designed to mislead the public about what causes higher energy prices, rather than to educate the public about the reality of peak oil.

Obama is misleading the public about what causes higher energy prices

MSNBC is a big business news network, why would anyone be surprised at their reaction. The other side says we only have to drill more, so it seems no one in government let's on that they get it.

The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
... Theodore Roosevelt

I picked up my pile of mail today, and right on top was Time Magazine with a cover that said: "THE TRUTH ABOUT OIL" with a big oil drop for the cover photograph.

This is it, I thought. If Time Magazine has a big article about peak oil, this will put it right into the national conversation.

So I sat down and read it first thing. Its not a bad article...it discusses Bakken oil and sub-salt Brazil oil and tar sands and oil shales and china and saudi arabia. It talks about oil spikes and economic recessions and booms and busts.

But it doesn't even mention peak oil.

Not a word. I couldn't believe it. How the heck does Time Magazine have the gall to pretend to tell "the truth" about oil without even mentioning peak oil

Damn.

Last edited by Plantagenet on Tue 17 Apr 2012, 17:35:53, edited 2 times in total.

Plantagenet wrote:I picked up my pile of mail today, and right on top was Time Magazine with a cover that said: "THE TRUTH ABOUT OIL" with a big oil drop for the cover photograph.

This is it, I thought. If Time Magazine has a big article about peak oil, this will put it right into the national conversation.

So I sat down and read it first thing. Its not a bad article...it discusses Bakken oil and sub-salt Brazil oil and tar sands and oil shales and china and saudi arabia. It talks about oil spikes and economic recessions and booms and busts.

But it doesn't even mention peak oil.

Not a word. I couldn't believe it. How the heck does Time Magazine have the gall to pretend to tell "the truth" about oil without even mentioning peak oil

Damn.

Everyone uses google. Everyone picks up punch lines and googles them. The punch line can be left out, but it's still peak oil. Admin will notice a significant spike in the next weeks from this article, which would have been considerably larger had the punch line been spelled out for the ignorant. If big oil and the MSM could, they would patent the term and subvert it completely.